Talk:Risk–benefit ratio

Medicine Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Expand[edit]

This stub appears to be written from the perspective of clinical trials, but the concept is really much broader than that. Perhaps someone with a background in economics will be able to provide a more complete description. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:54, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed[edit]

This could really do with some expansion. There has been some blogging recently about risk-benefit analysis and an internal BP powerpoint slide that was unearthed during legal discovery in a case following the Texas City Refinery explosion and how it relates to the recent Deepwater Horizon oil spill. See for example http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-05-25/shocking-bp-memo-and-the-oil-spill-in-the-gulf/full/

Also of interest is the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration figures for doing risk-benefit analysis when "determining which improvements should and should not be implemented when improving older roads, streets, and highways" among other things. From http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/facts_stats/t75702.cfm (with a requirement to update the figures annually to account for inflation):

COMPREHENSIVE COSTS IN POLICE-REPORTED CRASHES BY ABBREVIATED INJUR SCALE (AIS) SEVERITY (1994 Dollars)
SEVERITY	DESCRIPTOR	COST PER INJURY (DOLLARS)
AIS 1	Minor	5,000
AIS 2	Moderate	40,000
AIS 3	Serious	150,000
AIS 4	Severe	490,000
AIS 5	Critical	1,980,000
AIS 6	Fatal	2,600,000

Unfortunately I know nothing more about the subject than this, but it appears to be used all over the place and I was surprised to find such a short stub article on Wikipedia. I might have a go myself if no-one else steps forward. 87.157.203.174 (talk) 19:10, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just Medicine?[edit]

I'm surprised that this article isn't included in discussions of Economics and investments. In any case, I thought I'd point out that a lack of control may be especially difficult to face in the light of decisions made by others (for the treatment of a patient, say), whose values aren't known well, and in advance. This 1000-fold increase in risk-aversion represents a mere ten binary yes-no decisions made for a person by another set of persons, in which the quality of each decision may be seen as contributing to what the patient may view as an adverse outcome. That 1000-fold aversion seems optimistic in that many more than ten such decisions might be made. -- TheLastWordSword (talk) 16:44, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested move to "Risk benefit ratio"[edit]

Per WP:Common name, this article should be moved to risk benefit ratio, which is currently a redirect to this article. That phrase is by far the most commonly used phrase, by a ratio of 10.5 to 1:

risk benefit ratio - 181,000,000 results
risk benefit analysis - 17,300,000 results

Brangifer (talk) 04:09, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Since no one has objected yet, I'm going to make the move. -- Brangifer (talk) 05:07, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]